Manchester Withington, and "the infighting is so vicious as the stakes are so low."
I've talked previously about doing something about constructive engagement in my constituency of Manchester, Withington.
In the 2005 election, it was won by the local students getting out to/the vote, and engaging and winning on something close to the merits of an argument and the issues.
But is it no longer more important to be right than it is to win?
The current crop of young, local LibDem activists seems to have mostly studied at the Rovian School of Racing to the Bottom. That may not be that much of a surprise given average 2nd year undergrad today (ie the engaged undergraduates locally) will have only been 12 during the 2000 US election, and only 9 in 1997. Some of the stuff Gordon Brown is doing nationally has potentials. That kind of debate is likely to be all they will have ever seen. What the effects of that are within the next 5 or so years, will be interesting. As with many things, while the high level impacts matter to most people, the longer view results will be based on the impact that type of attack-ad politics has on the children.
Previously, it's been a matter of pride amongst my (generally older) LibDem friends that they "just don't do that sort of thing" (the kind of comment where the phrase "old chap" wouldn't be out of place); it would appear that the future may not be quite so bright.
What impact will that have on Manchester Withington, where the activists in a year or two are even more likely to have been brought up on this tactic, and whether that will suit the kind of constructive engagement which makes for a good debate, but not an easy win.
Or will they learn the right lesson, that the politics of hope, exemplified by Obama in the US at the moment, can come over here, and pull the debate to something where substance wins over style?
In the 2005 election, it was won by the local students getting out to/the vote, and engaging and winning on something close to the merits of an argument and the issues.
But is it no longer more important to be right than it is to win?
The current crop of young, local LibDem activists seems to have mostly studied at the Rovian School of Racing to the Bottom. That may not be that much of a surprise given average 2nd year undergrad today (ie the engaged undergraduates locally) will have only been 12 during the 2000 US election, and only 9 in 1997. Some of the stuff Gordon Brown is doing nationally has potentials. That kind of debate is likely to be all they will have ever seen. What the effects of that are within the next 5 or so years, will be interesting. As with many things, while the high level impacts matter to most people, the longer view results will be based on the impact that type of attack-ad politics has on the children.
Previously, it's been a matter of pride amongst my (generally older) LibDem friends that they "just don't do that sort of thing" (the kind of comment where the phrase "old chap" wouldn't be out of place); it would appear that the future may not be quite so bright.
What impact will that have on Manchester Withington, where the activists in a year or two are even more likely to have been brought up on this tactic, and whether that will suit the kind of constructive engagement which makes for a good debate, but not an easy win.
Or will they learn the right lesson, that the politics of hope, exemplified by Obama in the US at the moment, can come over here, and pull the debate to something where substance wins over style?
Labels: withington
2 Comments:
so sweetly hopeful.
Yet somewhat disturbing you refer to second years as 'the children'
I meant the impacts on people who were children then, not necessarily now :)
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home